I hate the word ‘Consumer’ or I mockingly call it ‘CONSOOMER’. Because that’s to imply everyone in the world is just cattle, but with wallets. We’re no longer customers. We’re consumers now. And a consumer’s purpose is to consume shit, whatever is put out there. Got money? Shut up and consume, it’s what corporate interests and capitalism itself thrive on. Consume and consume.

  • Cotillion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    145
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Influencer. Plain and simple. I hate when i hear it on tv, when someone calls themselve like that ugh.

    • RQG@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      1 year ago

      I use it as a derogatory term. Content creator is for the people who create content that is imo valuable. Influencers I use for the type of person who makes content to sell as space.

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        Content is another one of those words. If you make youtube vidoes, the stuff you make isn’t just some generic random “content” goo. It’s videos, right?

        • whelks_chance@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          A lot of the time they also have a podcast, instagram, and/or live stream to Twitch, often to the same audience. So “content” is the catch-all for all the output together.

          It’s a bit clunky but for whatever reason it’s the term which has stuck around.

        • Wolf Link 🐺@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not all videos have actual “content” tho. Reaction videos for example are just videos another person created while the uploader shoves their face into the camera and grimaces a bit. Or compilations, which are just a lazy no-effort way to bulk-repost stuff other people made. Or these bullshit “X movie in full length” videos that are 2+ hours of just displaying a download link.

          I would not call these people “content creators” IMHO, even tho they do, in fact, create and upload videos.

          (This is just my personal opinion tho, nothing “official” in any way)

          • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think pure reactions evolved from shock emotion videos ( See Barbara encounter a Reaper Leviathan for the first time ) which is a shitpost version of punking videos.

            I appreciate some informed take videos, such as a chef watching The Menu and sharing inside knowledge.

          • SpiderShoeCult@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            reaction videos along with influencers are some of the most idiocracy-themed crap that humanity managed to come up with

            can’t wait for the inevitable ‘ow my balls’ streams so we can all watch and 'bate

            • jcit878@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              sounds genuinely more interesting than sssniperwolf saying “OH MY GOD” to yet another stream of tiktoks

        • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          content comes from the same work-production space that copy does (as in written prose, not as in Xerox). It’s stuff that is regarded as product for consumers

          This is shop talk that shouldn’t be used out in public, but we have the internet now so it leaked and is part of the common parlance. Sadly, it does belie the perception of content as product, rather than art or otherwise the result of a creative, generative process. And it does belie the view of viewers as money cattle that have to be coerced into buying, strangely independent of the workforce they don’t pay enough to be able to buy and enjoy their own products.

        • PixxlMan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agreed. The best way to describe my feelings towards the terms “content” and “consumer” and especially “contäent consumption” is that it sounds… decadent and sad. Is that really all you feel? The movies you watch, art you experience and videos you watch, they’re nothing more than ““content”” to be ““consumed””, to temporarily distract you until the next bit of “content”? Nothing more?

      • Susaga@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        There was an OSPod (Overly Sarcastic Productions), and Blue mentioned how they’re content creators, not influencers. Red then corrected him that the correct term is artist.

        • RQG@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          If there is an artistic part to the content the sure. If someone is reporting news I’d say it’s more akin to a journalist for example. Or a comedy show I might call a performer or comedian. But sure I know content creators who make set as well. Good point.

        • I see content creator as a developer of social media content, especially video shorts like on YouTube and TikTok.

          There’s some intersection with developers of short form movies and television, but it’s definitely its own field and they know each other and mostly respect each other… and miss Lindsay Ellis.

    • aard@kyu.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      I find it quite useful as warning that you’ll now hear about the opinion of a moron which you can safely ignore.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah the whole influencer thing came too late. We have curators (people who find cool stuff and rave about it) and then critics (people who look at multiple offerings in the same category and give a measured take on each, sometimes comparing and contrasting).

      But for most mechandise the most accessible voices are the ones who are bought by marketing departments and are obligated to give positive reviews. Curators now push the stuff they were paid to push. Critics are paid to give positive reviews, so to the viewers and readers, we can’t expect a fair assessment.

      Not that this is a new phenomenon, but these roles had long been generally known as corrupted and biased before anyone called themselves an influencer, so I suspect the role is closer to Only Fans accounts that sell small amounts of lover / partner engagement to lonely people. Influncers are non-premium OF with ads and no nudity.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Before the internet critics were in magazines or on tv, paid for by advertising some of the products they review

        It has always been so

        • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Absolutely. I remember a lecture in th 80s that described junketeering. A photograhy reviewer would get invited to Tokyo for the review of a new Cannon $500+ lens (in '80s dollars!) includiing a week of sightseeing and fancy meals and would get to keep the lens! You can bet, given a choice of raving about the lens and getting to go next year, or offering a measurd opinion and risking getting uninvited, they would choose the former.

          Post internet, even casual hobbyists know about press junkets and scoop rackets, so when the AAA wizard game gets 9.5/10 on gamespot, it no longer means anything. (Novices and grandparents buying computer games for their grandkids will still believe the reviews, though.)

          • psud@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I follow a car YouTube channel “Auto Expert John Cadogan”, he’s now an independent commenter in the car space, but he used to work for a car magazine and car tv show.

            He talks about the junkets and really enjoys telling his viewers how bad the brands he used to have to support are. I think he’s on YouTube because he has the money and time and misses being on TV, he’s clearly not paid by any of the car companies

            Knowing how it works you see it in online reviews - a 3d printer guy when reviewing never says anything bad about any of the brands that send him early release new printers, because they’ll stop supplying him if he doesn’t praise their new machine

    • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      When I first heard the term it was on that Black Mirror episode about the star ratings affecting people’s real lives, and I thought it was just an appropriately creepy and dystopian term made up for the creepy dystopian show. Then I learned it’s what those people actually called themselves and it’s so gross.

      If your job title literally means “I convince people to want stuff I have” you probably need to get in the sea.

    • Poob@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wish we had a good term. “Content Creator” is meaningless and allows vapid instagram and tiktok people to slip in. Film maker has some serious connotations with Hollywood and movies that will give people the wrong idea. Media creator kinda works, but it isn’t specific to what type of media. YouTuber is strongly coupled to a corporation, so that sucks. Memeist? Video maker?

    • WhoRoger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It is an oddly accurate term tho, only except that everyone with 50 followers calls themselves that.

      I guess it is rather a mirror to society than anything else, that influencing opinions is a job - also think politics, marketing, lawyers, religions… Pretty weird society we have, if you think about it.

      Also I can’t remember the right term, someone help me out - but isn’t the proper term for most news something like “opinion making”?

    • chief_chef@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly, how do people get ‘influenced’ anyways? I think it says something about people following them and thinking them ‘influencers’ are nice and likeable people. They often ignore other’s privacy and aura.